anamorphic adaptor/squeeze res chart

[lacuna]

Big favour to ask:

Can anyone with the adaptor and a 100a post two frames for comparison, one with the adaptor and one using squeeze, preferably of a res chart or something equally useful.

I've read everything on the topic but this would be really useful for myself and others. Barry and Jarred posted one in their new review... but they did not include the adaptor.

Well, I'm crossing my fingers that someone will do this :)

[Barry_Green]

I've posted these before on this forum, but it's been a while, if you search in the last year you might find it. From memory, the adapter delivers about 540 TV lines, Squeeze delivers somewhere around 360.

[lacuna]

Thanks Barry - it took me forever but I found it:

http://www.dvxuser.com/cgi-bin/DVX2/YaBB.pl?board=Links;action=display;num=1089256453; start=0

plus I read a million other useful comments you made about resolution in general - you know what, your posts are consistently well written and informative.

But I'm curious, after reading all your posts on using the adaptor, it seems that capturing more res is an important consideration for you. To my amateur eyes, the res charts in your three camera review show a fairly substantial res gain for the XL2 over the DVX. The Xl2 grabs just looks a heck of a lot cleaner and sharper to me - even in 4:3 with the XL2 heavilly cropped.

So, given that you have to somewhat sacrifice the DVX's superior low light performance with the adaptor in place (ie: employ higher f stops), if you had to choose a DV camera now for an indi production and it was solely for the 16:9 market, which of the two would you go with?

[Barry_Green]

Solely for the 16:9 market? *An XL2 with the 16x manual lens.

But then, you're talking about a $5500 camera vs. a $3300 camera.

And you'd have to be sure that you wouldn't need autofocus or OIS.

But if you could control those factors, and could afford the XL2, and the 16:9 resolution was a vitally important factor, then I'd go with the XL2.

[lacuna]

Hey, that actually speaks volumes for your impartiality on the review.

Thanks a lot for your input. :)